WAR ON TERROR 10-12, 14-17 Fight Against
Terrorism and Al-Qaida/Yemeni Efforts/Saudi Arabia Efforts
18 Rewards for Justice Program

IRAQ 14
Threat to Region

AFGHANISTAN 14,17 Amb Dobbins in
Kabul/US Presence

SAUDI ARABIA 16-17 Detention of
Saudi Princess

HAITI 19-20 Mob Violence and Need for
Dialogue

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF STATE DAILY PRESS
BRIEFING

DPB #177

TUESDAY, DECEMBER 18, 2001 (ON THE
RECORD UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED)

12:50 p.m. EST

MR.
BOUCHER: Good afternoon, ladies and gentlemen. I don't
have any statements or announcements. I would be glad to
take your questions.

QUESTION: Is General Zinni coming to
town today, seeing the Secretary?

MR. BOUCHER: No, he is
not coming to town today. The Secretary has been in touch
with him on the telephone and they have talked about the
situation, and I'm sure they will see each other in the next
few days. General Zinni will report to the Secretary and to
the President about his mission.

As you know, he remains
engaged. His mission continues. We will continue to work
with the parties to see how to move forward.

QUESTION:
Richard, I understand the Secretary spoke to Chairman Arafat
this morning?

MR. BOUCHER: He spoke to both Prime
Minister Sharon and Chairman Arafat this
morning.

QUESTION: Well, according to the Palestinian
side -- and I'm sure you'll have some comment on this -- the
Secretary congratulated the Chairman on his fine speech and
said basically, okay, now you don't have to do anything
else. Is that correct?

MR. BOUCHER: I don't know what
characterization the Palestinian side has given to the phone
call. I don't think it corresponds with what I just heard
from you.

The conversations the Secretary had today with
Prime Minister Sharon and Chairman Arafat were to look at
how to move forward, how to continue efforts to end the
violence. The Secretary stressed clearly to Chairman Arafat
that he needs to take firm and decisive steps to end the
violence. He noted that we have seen a number of steps.
Chairman Arafat laid out for him a number of the things he
was doing.

The Secretary noted that we have seen some
positive actions from the Palestinian side, but also said
those actions need to be completed, they need to be made
effective, there need to be more actions to make an
effective end to the violence and that was the tenor of
their discussion.

The Secretary also said, as we have
before, that direct Israeli- Palestinian contacts,
particularly on security issues, are important to end the
violence, and in his conversations with both sides
encouraged them to continue those kind of
contacts.

QUESTION: (Inaudible.)

MR. BOUCHER: And the
other call?

QUESTION: To Sharon.

MR. BOUCHER: Oh,
Sharon. It was similar.

QUESTION: The same thing?

MR.
BOUCHER: Well, the comment about direct contacts applies to
both. The Secretary encouraged both parties to continue
their contacts, to work together to end the violence. We do
think that Israel needs to be prepared to do its part to
create an environment in which Palestinians can sustain and
expand their efforts.

It is important that Israelis work
to alleviate the pressures on the Palestinian people,
especially restrictions that impose real hardships and make
day-to-day living difficult. But we continue to put the
primary emphasis today on the efforts by Chairman Arafat to
effectively, decisively and in a sustained manner deal with
the causes of violence.

QUESTION: Did the conversations
include a direct suggestion of a resumption in security
talks? Are we asking them to start those back up even
though --

MR. BOUCHER: As I said, we have encouraged them
to continue contacts to work together to stop the violence.
We have certainly encouraged Chairman Arafat to take very
specific steps and to continue the steps that he
started.

QUESTION: But what about specifically resuming
the talks that we were facilitating?

MR. BOUCHER: We have
always felt that direct security talks were important, and
so that is a subject we continue to discuss with
them.

QUESTION: When you said you encouraged Prime
Minister Sharon to hold direct contacts, do you mean with
Chairman Arafat himself, or was that not mentioned in the
conversation?

MR. BOUCHER: I don't think that specific
issue was mentioned. The issue before us now is how to stop
the violence. We have always felt that concerted action,
decisive action by Chairman Arafat and security contacts
especially, direct contacts between the two sides, are what
is most important to stopping the violence. And that is
what we talked about with them today.

QUESTION: Richard,
when he was speaking to Arafat, you said that Arafat had
laid out to him a number of steps he was taking. And then
you said the Secretary said the action needed to be
completed. Is that -- is he still asking for Chairman
Arafat to do more than what Arafat told him he was doing on
the phone?

And, secondly, when he was talking to Sharon
about taking these steps to ease the Palestinian suffering,
was he talking about doing that only after Arafat takes
these steps and completes them, or doing them now?

MR.
BOUCHER: The discussion -- he didn't go through that in any
detail with Prime Minister Sharon. The discussion was
primarily devoted to what do we need to do right now to stop
the violence. But we have also made clear in general terms,
and sometimes in specific terms, that Israel needs to be
prepared to do its part.

QUESTION: Right, but that's
different --

MR. BOUCHER: As for the conversation with
Chairman Arafat, yes, he heard from Chairman Arafat on a
number of steps they were taking. He said those steps are
welcome, they need to be completed, they need to be made
effective and they need to be added to, in order to ensure
the effectiveness of efforts to stop the
violence.

QUESTION: The language seems to change a little
bit. You are saying Israel needs to be prepared to do its
part. But before, you have been saying Israel needs to
respond to or should respond to steps that Arafat was
taking. Why the change?

MR. BOUCHER: To make it more
interesting for you.

QUESTION: Oh --

QUESTION: Can we
put this in another way, because --

MR. BOUCHER: I think
that the view is the general context that, as we see the
Palestinians start to take steps and as we push the
Palestinians very hard to continue to take steps to make --
to end the -- to dismantle the groups, to end the violence,
to stop the violence, we think that it's important to
remember that Israel also needs to be prepared to do their
part.

I wouldn't ask, you know, of any specific steps at
this moment. But they are -- it's necessary for them to be
ready to do things and to work to alleviate the pressures on
the Palestinian people. That has always been something we
have made clear.

QUESTION: You did say, "I wouldn't ask
for any specific steps at this moment." But the
Palestinians have started to take some steps, I think.

MR.
BOUCHER: That's what I said.

QUESTION: Yes, that's what
you said -- no, you didn't quite say that, but now you
have.

So can you give us a clear idea of how you envisage
the phasing of these two -- of these two things?

MR.
BOUCHER: No, I am not out here to lay out you do this, you
do that, you know, how it all fits together. That work does
need to be done and it needs to be done by the parties in
direct context. It is done when there is an opportunity by
General Zinni or other representatives that the United
States has out there.

The important thing is that as we
see the Palestinians starting to take steps, we first and
foremost want to see these steps completed, made effective.
And, second of all, we need to remind the Israelis that they
need to be prepared to do their part. That is exactly where
we are today.

QUESTION: But not to do anything, just to
be prepared to do them?

MR. BOUCHER: I am not going to
try to take it any farther today.

QUESTION: With regards
to the situation in the Middle East, what kind of message
are you going to be giving to the EU leaders as they come to
town tomorrow, as I understand it?

MR. BOUCHER: We will
be seeing, I think, the Belgian Prime Minister and EU High
Representative Solana tomorrow. They will come in and they
will visit with the Secretary. I am sure -- they are coming
to brief the Secretary on the results of the European
Council Summit in Laeken this past weekend. They will also,
I'm sure, discuss the situation in the Middle East,
counter-terrorism cooperation and Afghanistan.

As for the
Middle East, the message will be the basic one that we have
been delivering throughout, and that is the international
community needs to be united in supporting an end to
violence, we need to make the message quite clear,
especially to Chairman Arafat, that he needs to take steps
to stop the violence.

QUESTION: Can I just follow up?
Will there be any mention of Arafat's travel to Europe in
this conversation, do you think?

MR. BOUCHER: We will
have to see. If there is any such travel, it might be
mentioned. If there's not, it might not.

QUESTION: New
subject? Can you update us on the status of the suspicious
powder found in Armitage's office yesterday?

MR. BOUCHER:
Yesterday, about 4:00 p.m., the Office of the Deputy
Secretary received an envelope that contained about one
quarter of a teaspoon of white powder. The letter was
opened there. It had arrived through the regular Postal
Service mail. It was postmarked on October 29th. US Postal
Service officials have told us that the delay in delivery,
plus a brownish tinge on the envelope, indicate that the
envelope was irradiated. The air system to the office in
which the letter had been opened was shut down, the FBI was
notified, the FBI collected the suspicious substance, and
they will tell us when the results are available. We are
working closely with the FBI. There was also a hazardous
materials team that came to the building.

Preliminary
results indicate that the substance does not contain
anthrax. But we won't have a final result for 24 to 48
hours.

QUESTION: Did the person that opened the envelope
get a dosage of --

MR. BOUCHER: I will have to double
check if the person was already on antibiotics or not. But
that has been standard practice for us.

QUESTION: Do the
preliminary results indicate what this substance might
be?

MR. BOUCHER: I don't have anything to report at this
moment.

QUESTION: Can you tell us any more about the
envelope? It came from Texas, did you say?

MR. BOUCHER:
It was -- it had a return address that was in Texas. It had
a postmark that was in Texas. As I said, postmarked October
29th.

QUESTION: You're not giving us the return
address?

MR. BOUCHER: No.

QUESTION: Do you have a city
in Texas?

MR. BOUCHER: I think it was someplace called
Kennedy. Kennedy, Texas.

QUESTION: And no
note?

QUESTION: It used to be called Dallas.

QUESTION:
No note?

MR. BOUCHER: The -- no. The envelope contained
a powder only. There was no letter inside.

QUESTION:
Richard, I'm sorry, who explained the delay in the delivery?
The Postal Service?

MR. BOUCHER: The Postal Service said
that something postmarked the 29th that arrives in December,
whatever it is --

QUESTION: So it took them a month, a
month-and-a-half to deliver a letter from Texas to
here?

MR. BOUCHER: Yes. I don't want to blame it all on
them. We are also processing mail at a temporary facility
without our usual sorting equipment.

QUESTION: Was there
a First Class stamp on it?

MR. BOUCHER: No. As you know,
the Postal Service, once this material arrives at the Main
Post Offices for Federal Government, it gets trucked out to
Ohio, it gets irradiated and comes back. And that delay,
plus the brownish tinge on the envelope, indicates that it
was - -

QUESTION: You don't know --

MR. BOUCHER: --
probably irradiated, and therefore, we believe that there
was no immediate health hazard. We would rather get our
mail late and safe than early and potentially
dangerous.

QUESTION: Or lethal.

MR. BOUCHER: So we are
happy to have it irradiated. If it takes that time, we are
happy to wait.

QUESTION: -- meeting with the EU leaders
tomorrow. In the recent European Council, there was a
discussion about the ESDP and the relationship with non-EU
NATO members. Under the initiative of Great Britain and
with the help of the US, an agreement was brokered with
Turkey, the so-called Istanbul Paper, and Greece rejected
that. So there is still a problem with this issue.

What
is the US position on that?

MR. BOUCHER: I gave the US
position yesterday on this. The matter is now with the EU
and I guess we will look forward to hearing from them
tomorrow about where it stands.

QUESTION: Do you still
support the agreement of Istanbul with Turkey?

MR.
BOUCHER: We thought that the arrangements worked out were
fine with us, and as I said, the matter stands with the
European Union and we look forward to hearing from
them.

QUESTION: Richard, on the EU, what do you guys make
of what the EU had to say about the ABM withdrawal at
Laeken?

MR. BOUCHER: Didn't really notice. Should we
have paid more attention? I will look and see.

QUESTION:
I don't believe they said anything.

MR. BOUCHER: Well,
there you have it.

QUESTION: A related question, Richard.
What is the US position on the Galileo satellite system?
Have you been --

MR. BOUCHER: Is this a trick
question?

Here I am asked not to comment on something that
they didn't say. I won't say anything about what they
didn't say, and as far as the Galileo satellite system, I'll
check on it.

Any other obscure EU issues that I haven't
dealt with.

QUESTION: Actually, I have one that is kind
of EU-NATO related, which is when the Secretary was in
Brussels -- well, you can't speak to Secretary Rumsfeld who
was there just yesterday or this morning.

MR. BOUCHER:
Today.

QUESTION: Yes, right. But Secretary Powell, when
he was there, did he bring up with your staunch new NATO
allies their decision to not buy US fighter jets? I'm
talking about the Czechs and the Hungarians. But also the
Poles apparently are about to decide on this, and they are
also leaning away from the American-made product.

MR.
BOUCHER: The Secretary has been a staunch supporter of
American aircraft sales, and in his meetings from the very
beginning of the Administration, he has raised the fortunes
of American companies and the fact that we make the best
airplanes in the world. He has pressed that in a variety of
meetings.

So we are disappointed that the Czech Republic
and Hungary recently took steps forward in procuring
advanced supersonic fighter aircraft. We recognize these big
decisions also have implications for their military reform
programs, their abilities to meet force goal obligations to
NATO.

As the Czech Republic and Hungary determine their
future military requirements, we urge them to avoid major
defense procurements that could jeopardize other urgently
needed military reforms. The Secretary has raised these
issues about the cost, the spending, the implication for
other programs. But in the end, he has always said if
you're going to buy airplanes, you ought to buy American
ones.

And as far as the Polish matter goes, yes, the
Secretary met yesterday with the Polish Foreign Minister and
again said if they were going to procure advanced fighter
aircraft, we felt that we made the best ones and are
strongly supportive of our American companies.

QUESTION:
So do you think that their purchase of these jets and using
them could affect badly -- adversely affect NATO in some
way?

MR. BOUCHER: We have -- I think we have tried to
make clear all along that, as nations address these force
requirements and these purchases, they needed to consider
the overall impact on military reform programs and abilities
to meet their broader global force obligations to NATO. And
those are important questions that we think need to be
considered.

QUESTION: What is the military reform
program?

MR. BOUCHER: All the NATO members -- first of
all, all the NATO members have various force planning goals
and other requirements that we discuss consistently. And
then some of the newer NATO members are still in the process
of transforming their militaries and meeting
interoperability standards and things like that within
NATO.

QUESTION: So that should take precedence, you are
saying?

MR. BOUCHER: We think it is important to make
sure that we can meet those other goals, even as they look
at purchases.

QUESTION: And your caveat on that to the
two others applies also to Poland?

MR. BOUCHER: Yes. If
you're going to buy, buy American. But consider carefully
how you can meet your overall obligations.

QUESTION:
Richard, you seem to be saying -- let me get this straight.
Do you think it was unwise of these two governments to
decide to buy planes instead of doing something else with
the money?

MR. BOUCHER: I don't think I would use your
language. I think I will stick to my language,
thanks.

QUESTION: What was your language -- you think it
was what, then? You think --

MR. BOUCHER: As I said, we
think that they should avoid major defense procurements,
which could jeopardize other urgently needed military
reforms.

QUESTION: But if they are going to make them,
they should buy from the States and not from --

MR.
BOUCHER: Yes.

QUESTION: Well, okay, now I've got a
question.

MR. BOUCHER: Is that fair?

QUESTION: I don't
understand the interoperability thing that you just brought
up with Barry. Because, I mean, are you saying that, say,
French aircraft or British aircraft are not interoperable
within the NATO scheme of things? I mean, these countries
fly their own planes. Why can't -- why do the Czechs have to
buy your planes, and why can't they buy from someone -- I
mean, I can understand if they were buying from China, or
from -- (laughter) -- what's the deal?

MR. BOUCHER: My
turn?

QUESTION: Yes.

MR. BOUCHER: Nobody said they
can't buy some other airplane. We haven't argued that these
other airplanes cannot be interoperable with NATO -- with
American airplanes or NATO airplanes or other airplanes that
NATO maintains in its inventory. Our view has been that
when it comes to airplanes, first of all, we make the best
ones. And second of all, we make airplanes that have been
deployed throughout the world, that have been proven in
combat, that have been proven in lots of different
situations. And they have a demonstrated record of
interoperability, as well as performance. And we think we
make the best.

So we make that clear to other countries
when we talk to them.

QUESTION: But can't you let, you
know, Boeing and Lockheed Martin make their own sales pitch
for them?

MR. BOUCHER: We like to support American
workers, American companies.

QUESTION: All
right.

QUESTION: Sort of related to that. Can you just
expand on how the Secretary has raised the fortunes of
American aircraft companies? I'm just -- that was what you
said originally --

MR. BOUCHER: Perhaps it's not the best
phrase. He has raised the interests of American aircraft
companies in selling airplanes.

QUESTION: But he didn't
-- I just want to --

MR. BOUCHER: I didn't say he -- that
he -- I didn't mean to say that he brought more money their
way. No.

QUESTION: Okay. I just --

MR. BOUCHER: That
was a bad -- perhaps a bad choice of words. But that was
not the implication. He has raised the interest of American
companies in selling airplanes.

QUESTION: Switching
gears. Can you talk about the diplomatic situation between
India, Pakistan and what the US is doing at the moment to
try and keep them from starting something?

MR. BOUCHER:
For the moment, we are keeping in very close touch with both
India and Pakistan. The Secretary spoke yesterday evening
with the Indian Foreign Minister, Jaswant Singh. And our
Ambassadors in Islamabad and New Delhi are keeping in close
touch with the governments there.

Our basic view has not
changed. The basic view is the one that we stated
yesterday. The Indians need to conduct their investigation,
need to consider what the appropriate action might be to
help protect their people against terrorism, to help protect
their democracy against terrorism. But we think it is
incumbent upon all to make sure that we pursue the overall
effort against terrorism, and we have made quite clear in
our discussions with the Pakistani Government that as we
pursue terrorism next door, that all countries have an
obligation to work against terrorism within their own
borders, and that we look to the Pakistani Government to
work against extremist groups that operate out of
Pakistan.

QUESTION: I think I got your message. Can I
ask --

QUESTION: Can I follow up? In terms of the
Administration's involvement in Afghanistan, and needing
Pakistan's support for that, how much of an added burden is
this for the Administration to try and keep these two
adversaries apart?

MR. BOUCHER: I think the answer to
that is really that we recognize that the fight against
terrorism has many aspects and many facets. It is important
for all of us to go after terrorism, period. The fight
against al-Qaida and the people who have harbored them in
Afghanistan still has a ways to go to make sure that
al-Qaida can't operate in Afghanistan. But it is only part
of this broader effort that the President has decided on.
The President has made clear that we intend to go after
terrorism wherever it exists. We intend to go after groups
that are associated with al-Qaida. And we look to all the
countries involved, all the countries who have made this
basic commitment against terrorism to fight terrorism, to
carry out steps to make sure that terrorism doesn't flourish
within their borders. And so you see actions around the
world in a whole variety of places against groups that might
be supporting terrorism.

QUESTION: Can I follow up on
that? And you see action now in Yemen. Is it (a) part of
the al-Qaida mop-up; (b), terrorism generally; or, (c), (a)
and (b) combined?

MR. BOUCHER: Or, (d); (a), (b) and (c)
combined, possibly.

QUESTION: If you wish.

MR. BOUCHER:
Possibly. I'm not quite sure what the choices are there. I
don't have --

QUESTION: Well, there is a general campaign
against terrorism and there is a campaign against al-Qaida
specifically.

MR. BOUCHER: I think exactly what is --
what the Government of Yemen is doing and who the targets
are of these efforts that they're making, I think that is a
question you have to ask the Government of Yemen. I don't
have the answer for that for you.

What I would say is that
we just about two weeks ago we had a very, we think,
important and useful visit from the President of Yemen. It
is clear that he intends to go after terrorism, that he is
committed to the fight against terrorism. We welcomed that.
We offered our support, we offered our cooperation, and we
will continue to work with them in the overall fight.

But
as far as what specifically they are doing and who they are
going after now and what their connections are, I think you
have to get that from the Yemenis.

QUESTION: And on
Charlie's question, may I just ask one follow-up? India
charged today, and I don't hear you dismissing the
allegation, which is a message in itself, that the attack on
the parliament was Pakistan's attempt to attack the
leadership of the Indian Government.

Your statement is
very strong on terrorism. Do you have any -- does the State
Department have any basis for sharing India's
suspicions?

MR. BOUCHER: At this point, we understand the
Indian investigation is still under way. So I know there
have been a variety of statements and charges and other
statements made by people, but I think we look to the
Indians to complete their investigation and get -- see what
information they come up with.

QUESTION: Richard, if I
can follow on with that, you avoided part of my
question.

MR. BOUCHER: I didn't mean to.

QUESTION:
Perhaps you intended it, perhaps not.

MR. BOUCHER: Maybe
I did.

QUESTION: But you didn't address the strain, if
any, on US diplomats in the region to try and tamp this down
while we're looking for help from both of them in the war
--

MR. BOUCHER: I guess what I tried to say is we don't
really see it that way. We are not measuring strains in
pound per square inch or anything like that on this issue.
We are looking for cooperation from all nations against
terrorism. We see actions against these groups that have
been known to carry out terrorist acts to be part of that
overall campaign against terrorism. We look for action by
all governments to take action against groups like that
within their borders.

And so, as we work with India, as we
talk to India about their investigation and how they -- what
they can do to protect themselves against terrorism, we also
look to Pakistan to take action, not only with us against
terrorism generally, but also against extremist groups that
might be operating in their country.

QUESTION: Well,
Richard, you may not be measuring the strain in pounds per
square inch, but you certainly are measuring it on some
scale. I mean, yesterday, Ari Fleischer at the White House
talked about how the President didn't want this to "spin out
of control." Those were his exact words. Last night, on
television, the Secretary said -- not the same thing, but
kind of a similar thing -- we are concerned; we don't want
to see these two countries go after each other, which I
think is what he said.

So obviously there is some concern.
In light of that, the evident concern that has been
expressed already, General Taylor is going out to India.
Are there any plans for him to go to Pakistan as well? And
also, is there any thought being given to re-advertising
your interest in assisting some kind of mediation over
Kashmir if both sides would agree to it?

MR. BOUCHER:
First of all, did we -- I think somebody asked me yesterday
if General Taylor was going to go to Pakistan, and I didn't
get the answer for you. Did I? No. Okay. We will double
check on that one. I don't think we have timing, either. I
wouldn't expect it to happen until the beginning of the
year, when he goes to India.

On the issue of Kashmir, I
think our views are well known. Our willingness to help out
if they want us to is well known. At this point, clearly,
we don't want to see -- as I think I did mention, and the
Secretary has mentioned before, we don't want to see other
actions which can make more difficult the pursuit of
terrorism, which can make more difficult the fight against
terrorism in the region.

As the Secretary I think said, we
don't want to see them start fighting in Kashmir. That has
always been our view.

QUESTION: When you say, "We don't
want to see actions that can take away," does that include
statements, words, accusations that are made before all
investigations are completed?

MR. BOUCHER: I don't want
to make sweeping statements of that general nature that you
would probably apply to something specific that may or may
not be pertinent.

QUESTION: Well, I'm just noticing that
the Secretary called his friend Mr. Singh, but he didn't
call the Pakistani foreign minister.

MR. BOUCHER: The
Secretary has talked to President Musharraf, I think right
after the attacks, at least once. I can't remember; it
might have been more than that. The President has been in
touch with them. We have been in touch with the Pakistani
Government in a whole variety of ways and at a variety of
levels.

QUESTION: I'm talking about the Parliament.

MR.
BOUCHER: Yes, the attack on Parliament.

QUESTION: Oh,
okay.

QUESTION: Can (inaudible)?

MR. BOUCHER:
Okay.

QUESTION: Can you tell us any more today about what
specifically you have asked in general of the Pakistanis to
deal with the terrorism that has emanated from their country
before against India?

MR. BOUCHER: I will leave it with
what I said before. We are looking for them to take action
against extremist groups that might be operating from there,
within Pakistan.

QUESTION: Does that mean, like -- you
can't say closing down offices, ending them -- I mean, the
stuff that we have been getting on other areas?

MR.
BOUCHER: There is a whole host of obligations which are
incumbent upon every country because of the UN resolutions.
We think that all governments should take those
actions.

QUESTION: Maybe not a necessary question, but I
want to be clear. This advice, "Go after extremist groups,"
is irrespective of whether those groups have targeted
Americans or American property? It's terrorism, per se? Or
is it? I have a reason for asking. But, you know, you've
been told by --

MR. BOUCHER: Well, tell me your reason
before I give you an answer.

QUESTION: Here's the
reason.

MR. BOUCHER: Full disclosure.

QUESTION: The
Foreign Minister of Egypt was here recently, and the Foreign
Minister of Egypt spoke very strongly about the culprits in
the September 11th bombing and how they should be pursued,
and how awful they were, and how much Egypt supports that.
And with the same breath, he cautioned the United States not
to take action -- and Iraq was on the table at the moment --
not to take action against an Arab government, that the Arab
governments would not appreciate that. Okay?

So the
question arises whether you need to satisfy Egypt and maybe
other Arab governments, whether you have to have an attack
against Americans as a rationale for counterterrorism
efforts in Arab countries, or is terrorism itself -- against
whoever -- reason enough to make this appeal, whatever these
Arab governments may say?

It's pretty clear.

MR.
BOUCHER: No, it's not. First of all, the President has
defined the problem as terrorism of global
reach.

QUESTION: Correct.

MR. BOUCHER: That is the
issue. You know that there are groups on the US terrorism
list that have contacts in Iraq. And I think if you read
our Patterns of Global Terrorism Report, you will see why
Iraq has been listed and continues to be listed as a state
sponsor of terrorism. So there is no question of those
links.

Iraq is its own -- Iraq is not only a problem from
that standpoint. Iraq is a problem because of developing
weapons of mass destruction. Now, they may not be a
conventional weapons threat anymore to their neighbors. But
we are very concerned about the possibility of what they
might be doing in the areas of weapons of mass destruction.
We have made that abundantly clear. And we have also made
clear that they need to let the inspectors back in. So
there is a lot more to Iraq than your question would
imply.

QUESTION: Ambassador Dobbins is in Islamabad as
well. Is that so?

MR. BOUCHER: He was recently, in the
last 12 hours or so.

QUESTION: Is he on his way back to
the States already, after --

MR. BOUCHER: No, he will be
in Kabul for the -- when the interim authority assumes power
on the 22nd, so we expect him to be there.

QUESTION: And
then he comes back?

MR. BOUCHER: And then I think he
comes back, yes.

QUESTION: Is he an official
representative -- will he be the person who represents the
US at that?

MR. BOUCHER: I will have to see if there is
anybody else. But I know he will be there representing the
United States there.

QUESTION: Can we go back to Yemen
for a moment? Can you tell us whether it is your
understanding that the action taken by the Yemeni forces was
related in any way to an American request of some kind or
information provided by the American side about
individuals?

MR. BOUCHER: I don't have any information on
that.

QUESTION: Are you pleased that they made the attack
--

MR. BOUCHER: I said, I don't have enough information
at this point to comment one way or the other,
frankly.

QUESTION: But you spoke of -- who was here, a
couple of weeks ago, the President?

MR. BOUCHER: The
President, yes.

QUESTION: How the US supported him in his
efforts to deal with terrorism.

MR. BOUCHER: He made a
strong commitment against terrorism and we welcome that and
we look forward to working with him. But as far as a
specific action by the Yemeni Government, I will leave it
for the moment for them to explain what it is.

QUESTION:
Are these the kinds of actions you are looking for Chairman
Arafat to take in --

MR. BOUCHER: I don't know enough
about it to start applying the Yemeni model to every other
country in the world -- before you ask me whether this
applies in some other region as well.

QUESTION: What can
you tell us about the legal status of the Saudi princess
arrested and held on felony battery charges in Orlando? And
how will the debate over whether she has diplomatic immunity
-- do you think it will impact what many say are already
strained US-Saudi relations, in light of the number of
Saudis involved in the --

MR. BOUCHER: All right. First
of all, there are many, many Saudis in the United States,
and many Saudis studying here, and we certainly welcome
them, and that is, I think, an important part of our
relationship. So I don't think you should take one case and
make that into some enormous strain.

The issue of
diplomatic status is not merely what passport a person
holds, but what -- whether the person is accepted by the
host government as having diplomatic status. So we either
have to issue a diplomatic visa, or we have to somehow
receive notification and acknowledge that the person has
diplomatic status.

I am not aware that that had occurred
in this particular case. So that may not be an issue
here.

QUESTION: The Princess may not have diplomatic
status, is what you're saying?

MR. BOUCHER: Yes. She
would have to have been notified or otherwise accepted by us
for diplomatic status.

QUESTION: That's it exactly. I
mean, you say she may not, but can you say that she
doesn't?

MR. BOUCHER: I don't have a definitive answer
from my people at this point. But we are not aware that
that has happened, is the way I have to put it for the
moment.

QUESTION: That what has happened, that she
--

MR. BOUCHER: That she was granted diplomatic status by
the United States.

QUESTION: How would you characterize
at this point the type of cooperation today the US is
getting with Saudi Arabia on issues like freezing funds to
terrorist groups and tracking down people connected to
al-Qaida?

MR. BOUCHER: I'm afraid your colleagues are
amused, because they ask the question every day, and I give
the same answer, because it's true.

QUESTION: Are you
going to talk about the basis again? We're talking about
--

QUESTION: Wait, wait. She asked a
question.

QUESTION: I'm just asking for a
characterization.

MR. BOUCHER: No, I know. And it's a
good question, because I think it's one that is widely
misunderstood amongst some people in this room. (Laughter.)
And I am always happy to give the truth to
somebody.

QUESTION: It is people who aren't in this room
that keep writing it.

MR. BOUCHER: I know. I have
convinced you all.

Levity aside, we have worked very
closely with the Saudi Government in a whole variety of
areas. We have law enforcement cooperation, financial
cooperation, and various other forms of security and other
cooperation with the Saudi Government. They have agreed to
everything we have put before them in terms of what we
needed to conduct this campaign against terrorism, and our
cooperation has been very good, it has been very useful, it
has been a very important part of the campaign.

QUESTION:
Do you anticipate the Princess' case is going to put an
added strain?

MR. BOUCHER: I don't think I would say that
at this point. As I said, there are many, many Saudis in
the United States, there are many students here, there are
many who travel. And I don't think we can take one case and
believe that it really disrupts that whole
relationship.

QUESTION: There are many Saudis, and even
there are many princesses, but this isn't an ordinary Saudi.
Has there been a request for consular access that you know
of?

MR. BOUCHER: I don't know.

QUESTION: On a related
topic. Can you say, along the same line, in terms of the
impact on the US-Saudi relationship, how I guess a lawsuit
against the Pentagon from this woman regarding dress codes
is going to affect that?

MR. BOUCHER: No, I couldn't.
(Laughter.)

QUESTION: Another one on the
Princess.

QUESTION: It's not the Princess. It's a
different thing. There are US military personnel in Saudi
Arabia. They have to dress a certain way, and there is now
going to be this lawsuit.

MR. BOUCHER: I haven't heard
about it, and I will leave the Pentagon to comment on
it.

QUESTION: I have another legal-type question. Have
you ever gotten an answer -- have you gotten an answer yet
back from the lawyers on the status of the liaison mission
in Kabul, or are you just hoping that question will quietly
fade away?

MR. BOUCHER: I was hoping to have something to
say to you before you asked it again.

The designation of a
post as an embassy is something that requires a certain
bureaucratic procedure to be carried out, and I'm sure we
will do it at the appropriate time.

QUESTION: Okay. Can
I ask a related question then? What plans or what talk has
there been from the interim government about establishing a
similar office here in Washington?

MR. BOUCHER: I don't
know. You would have to ask them.

QUESTION: Okay. And
can you clarify something the Pentagon seems to be -- people
at the Pentagon seem to be going around saying that there is
a $10 million reward for the capture, conviction, whatever
of Mullah Omar. And I don't know if this is -- is this in
some way related to the DS thing? Or is this something that
they are doing completely on their own?

MR. BOUCHER: I
don't know. You would have to ask over there. Certainly,
our general reward program applies to --

QUESTION: To
him?

MR. BOUCHER: No, applies to people who have carried
out terrorist acts or might be planning terrorist acts or
involved in terrorist acts against Americans, and I don't
exactly know what evidence there might be against Mullah
Omar in that connection, frankly.

QUESTION: Okay, so can
you look into that, though, and just find out if there is
something --

MR. BOUCHER: No, I would suggest that if
that's coming out of the Pentagon, then you ask over at the
Pentagon.

QUESTION: Well, then they said that it was part
of your program. So that's why I'm asking you.

MR.
BOUCHER: I don't think I have anything on that,
frankly.

QUESTION: Back on the subject of embassies.
There are reports that the US Embassy in Burma has stopped
issuing visas, and I'm wondering, is that embassy closing to
the public? Or has there been a threat? What's going
on?

MR. BOUCHER: I haven't checked on the Embassy in
Burma. I will double check for you and find out what the
status is.

QUESTION: Mr. Boucher, you said that the
Pakistani Government has been asked to take action against
terrorists or militant groups, but there have also been
reports that India might take action against groups based in
Pakistan. So that would add a new dimension to the entire
thing. Would you have a comment on that?

MR. BOUCHER: I
wouldn't want to speculate at this point. I have described
our position before. I think I will just leave it at
that.

QUESTION: Can you tell us anything about this
morning's meeting between the Secretary of State and the
Japanese Ambassador?

MR. BOUCHER: And the Japanese
Ambassador? No, I can't. I will see if there is anything
to say.

QUESTION: Getting back to Pakistan. Is there a
concern that bin Laden or some other al-Qaida leaders that
may have slipped over the border are in Pakistan, could
somehow destabilize the government? Is that something that
you have had conversations with --

MR. BOUCHER: No. The
Pakistani Government, as you know, has deployed a lot of
troops. They have increased the level of their vigilance in
the areas that abut Afghanistan, particularly those regions
where there has been fighting, where the al-Qaida people
have been reported.

I think they are making a lot of
efforts along the border. It is a mountainous and
inhospitable region, but they have made a lot of additional
efforts to try to make sure that that sort of thing doesn't
happen, and we are fairly confident that if it's possible to
find people trying to slip across the border, that they are
making every effort to do so.

QUESTION: Richard,
yesterday, when you were asked about Haiti, you came down
quite strongly on the side of the elected government of
President Aristide. There are a lot of charges today from
the opposition that this entire incident was cooked up by
Aristide's people in order to further crack down on the
opposition there. Have you -- one, have you sorted out what
basically -- do you know what actually happened there?

And
two, if you have -- well, I'll let you answer that.

MR.
BOUCHER: I think yesterday I condemned the violence and
said that we were always in favor of elected governments
when it came to being against the violence. But we didn't
have a lot of information on who exactly perpetrated this
attack, and what was involved. And frankly, we don't have
much more today. Port-au-Prince is calm today, one day
after this attack on the presidential palace. And the
ensuing mob violence, which I don't think had started, or
had gotten to the proportions that it finally did, about the
time that we were talking.

Our Embassy in Port-au-Prince
is open to the public for business. The airlines have
resumed their flights. But we make clear that we condemn
the violent attack on the palace, as well as the mob
violence that followed. The armed assault on the palace and
the response of pro- government supporters, which included
violent attacks on political opposition offices and homes,
is extremely troubling.

Yesterday's violence underscores
the need for dialogue and reconciliation among all elements
of Haitian society. The Organization of American States has
actively pursued efforts to broker a resolution to Haiti's
electoral crisis, and we have strongly supported the OAS
Secretary General in these efforts.

We urge the Government
political party, Lavalas, and the opposition coalition, the
Democratic Convergence, to participate in mediation efforts
led by the OAS and to reach a national agreement resolving
election issues. And we call on the Government of Haiti to
protect the rights of all Haitians, to take appropriate
measures to discourage vigilante actions, to respect the
rule of law and to maintain order.

So you do have a
situation that evolved there, and particularly the mob
violence that occurred after the attacks was something of
great concern to us.

QUESTION: So is it fair to say that
in general you are always going to side with the elected
government over any kind of attack that is going on? But if
that attack is provoked, or started by that government,
you're not going to like that? In general.

MR. BOUCHER:
You are trying to get me to make an obvious comment. In
general, yes. Does that apply to this particular situation?
I don't know. We don't have a lot of information about how
these attacks started. We certainly believe that the mob
violence that ensued is something that the government should
take responsibility for stopping, and they need to make more
efforts to ensure the rule of law and that calm can
prevail.

QUESTION: Okay. Last one. This week, the head
of the political wing of a done-good former terrorist group,
Gerry Adams, is in Cuba meeting with the head of a country
that is a state sponsor of terrorism, according to your
list. What do you make of that?

MR. BOUCHER: I don't
have any comment at this point. I will see if we want
to.

QUESTION: I have a related one. The DFLP, the
Democratic Front for the Liberation of Palestine, rejected
Arafat's appeal for an end to military operations. The
DFLP, of course, was removed from the FTO list about two
years ago. Do you have any comment on its attitude in this
case? And is it a candidate for reconsideration?

MR.
BOUCHER: I will double check on their status. I don't have
any particular comment at this moment.

In response to the challenges facing Scoop and the media industry we’ve instituted an Ethical Paywall to keep the news freely available to the public.
People who use Scoop for work need to be licensed through a ScoopPro subscription under this model, they also get access to exclusive news tools.

Limiting global warming to 1.5°C will require “far-reaching and unprecedented changes,” such as ditching coal for electricity to slash carbon emissions, says a special report that finds some of the actions needed are already under way, but the world must move faster… More>>

Oxfam and its local partners are standing by to deploy emergency staff and resources to the Indonesian island of Sulawesi, as an estimated 1.5 million people are thought to be affected by the massive earthquake and tsunami that hit on Friday. More>>

“This is a great day for India and for all those who believe in the universality of human rights," Bachelet said. "With this landmark decision, the Indian Supreme Court has taken a big step forward for freedom and equality...” More>>